China buying 38 Su-35MKKs ?

[gf0012-aust]

Yes Feanor, there would be far more than 4 Flankers + H6s, all coming from different directions, and armed with variety of missiles.

Good grief. How about some basic analysis rather than quoting straight aircraft specs and trying to convert them into an operational construct?

This is the same nonsense that APA trout out when citing an air invasion into australia or against the RAN.

• all directions? where is this mythical capability to deploy and deliver a concentric attack from land based air? Whats the loc? HINT. There are none - not unless the attacker decides to sit in the middle of the water between macau and Hong Kong.
• Lets be conservative and say that the surface fleet is spread out over 100sq miles. Do the math and work out the sensor spread - and that doesn't even include CAP/Air pickets or space based management (and that's standard as far as sig management for a fleet is concerend). For any aircraft to even consider a concentric attack on a dispersed alert war footing strike force means that they've run out of fuel before they even get to launch station.
• As much as some might get excited about transcontinental air launched weapons - the further out they launch, the greater the opportunity to counter. They're excellent against a 3rd world naval power or if the entire comms and sig management solution is "off". But against a power that will even know when a short squadron of critical assets has taken off - they're telegraphing already.

You get repeatedly asked to not throw in these scenarios and tactical proclamations without demonstrating rigour and providing sensible sources - I would have thought that after 3 bannings you'd have worked it out.

Make the effort or you'll be going on holiday again.

 

[Aussie Digger]

What do you all think about this animation?
Su-33 or its derivative against F-18E/F!

I wonder how Su-35 will differ from Chinese Su-33 follow on, besides folding wings and landing gear?

That was complete crap.

No USN combat air patrol. Even in "Top Gun" they had "2" fighters in the air when sitting off the coast, with "alert" fighters on the catapult ready for launch.

No AEW&C.

No CIWS.

SM-2/ESSM can NOT be deceived by flares. They are radar guided...

Despite it being a carrier battlegroup only one Destroyer was launching SM-2 missiles and only against the actual ASHM being fired. NONE against the incoming threat aircraft.

This simulation is just too silly for words.

 

[Feanor]

A concentric attack may become a reality if Chinese "aircraft-carrying cruisers" become operational in Pacific. 2-3 of them could launch a multi-directional strike, coming from several CBGs. Granted the scenario is certainly contrived (US super carriers would easily outnumber Chinese aircraft carrying cruisers) and not particularly likely, but for a hypothetical discussion on Chinese carriers ( ) it's certainly not out of bounds.

 

[citizen578]

I've heard rumours of Argentina planning to buy a batch of Su-35s, possibly in concert with Brazil.

Bearing in mind this comes after many years of attempting to procure F-16 or Mirage2000s...

how plausible is this?

 

[Feanor]

Brazil rejected the Su-35BM in the FX tender, so it's not likely. Do you have a link to Argentinian plans?

 

[citizen578]

unfortunately not. after trawling the internet for a while, i thought my best bet were the Gurus on this site! Several websites make mention of attempted Russian arms sales in Latin America, particularly at a recent Chilean exhibition, but only vague reference to Argentine re-armament.

 

[gf0012-aust]

A concentric attack may become a reality if Chinese "aircraft-carrying cruisers" become operational in Pacific. 2-3 of them could launch a multi-directional strike, coming from several CBGs. Granted the scenario is certainly contrived (US super carriers would easily outnumber Chinese aircraft carrying cruisers) and not particularly likely, but for a hypothetical discussion on Chinese carriers ( ) it's certainly not out of bounds.

If it's to be considered, then it means that the enemy has their own CBG's available and deployed - thats about 10-15 years for any major power using Su-3nn's to hit a "near peer" level.

In 10-15 years the sensor and weapons tech has moved along. (eg the US will have Link22 in AWACs, Aegis vessels, JSF etc.... @2010) Hypersonic multi stage will be at gen 1 etc...

So, it's either a scenario "here and now" or it's off the scale.

 

[gf0012-aust]

unfortunately not. after trawling the internet for a while, i thought my best bet were the Gurus on this site! Several websites make mention of attempted Russian arms sales in Latin America, particularly at a recent Chilean exhibition, but only vague reference to Argentine re-armament.

Poss wait for Salty Dog - he's the resident Sth American specialist.

 

[Feanor]

If it's to be considered, then it means that the enemy has their own CBG's available and deployed - thats about 10-15 years for any major power using Su-3nn's to hit a "near peer" level.

In 10-15 years the sensor and weapons tech has moved along. (eg the US will have Link22 in AWACs, Aegis vessels, JSF etc.... @2010) Hypersonic multi stage will be at gen 1 etc...

So, it's either a scenario "here and now" or it's off the scale.

When talking about Chinese carriers, we're already off the scale. Then again in 10-15 years it probably won't Flankers that are carrier mounted. And in any event lets not tie the discussion to platform specific comparisons. How feasible is it for several smaller CBGs to surround a US super carrier CBG and to use supersonic ASMs with tactical nuclear weapons, to launch a concentric attack and sink or disable the carrier?

 

[gf0012-aust]

When talking about Chinese carriers, we're already off the scale. Then again in 10-15 years it probably won't Flankers that are carrier mounted. And in any event lets not tie the discussion to platform specific comparisons. How feasible is it for several smaller CBGs to surround a US super carrier CBG and to use supersonic ASMs with tactical nuclear weapons, to launch a concentric attack and sink or disable the carrier?

Nothings invincible - anythings possible.

platforms, preparation, position, politics, placement, prosecution. : + timing

 

[Feanor]

But realistically does it offer an advantage to have several smaller CBGs ensnaring a larger one with a super-carrier at the heart of it? Or would it make more sense to simply build your own super carriers and hope yours is better then theirs? And what would you consider an effective anwser to CVBGs? Saturation was an interesting concept for the time, and given modern realities it would have been interesting to see how it evolved in the modern information-based warfare. I suppose we can't discount it as unfeasible even at this point (I mean realistically 2-3 Backfire rgts, and a Blackjack rgt could still pull it off right?), but are there any more modern effective counter measures?

 

[Salty Dog]

I've heard rumours of Argentina planning to buy a batch of Su-35s, possibly in concert with Brazil.

Bearing in mind this comes after many years of attempting to procure F-16 or Mirage2000s...

how plausible is this?

The Su-35 was a contender for the Brazilian F-X2 fighter competition, but was eliminated in the 1st round.

Argentina buying fighters? I have not heard anything. Hard to imagine though, the country is nearly broke.

Chile, no way, . . . they are quite happy with their F-16s.

Now if you want to focus on Venezuela, which bought some Su-30MKV, then the probability (at least desire) of buying Su-35s is very good. However, with oil prices below US$ 60 a barrel, this could change.

 

[citizen578]

Argentina buying fighters? I have not heard anything. Hard to imagine though, the country is nearly broke.

Indeed. I attempted a quick google search, and lo-and-behold, this came up:
http://www.defencetalk.com/forums/showthread.php?t=5947

Gives a good background, athough nobody's posted on the subject for a year and a half. I was hoping to get some more up to date info.

I agree that F-16s are higly unlikely, and despite Argentina's preference for 'buying French', money seems a little too tight at the moment for Mirage2000-5s which have been on the table for a long time. The Su35 suggestion was an interestig aspect.

 

[swerve]

I agree that F-16s are higly unlikely, and despite Argentina's preference for 'buying French', money seems a little too tight at the moment for Mirage2000-5s which have been on the table for a long time.

The purchase of Mirage 2000s of any variety is dependent on the availability of secondhand aircraft, as it is out of production, & very few are on the market at the moment.

 

[aayiliam]

Even getting secound hand 2000 will be tough to get as all the 2000 customers will hold on to theirs till Rafale proves itself on the market. or they will excahage these with the french for Rafales

 

[nevidimka]

Is that a radar in there?

 

[swerve]

... or they will excahage these with the french for Rafales

This is probably the most likely route for them to come onto the market.

 

[crobato]

Is that a radar in there?

It looks like something meant to kick the parachute out of the tail.

 

[Firehorse]

To me, it looks like it!
Some cool clips below:

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xwEUJvBfkRo&feature=related"]YouTube - Su-35 first show ( Russian TV)[/ame]

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xJu01918B_I&feature=related"]YouTube - Su-35/37- The King Of Fighter's Resurrection[/ame]

 

[Feanor]

Important highlights from the video, the Su-35BM is indeed testbed for 5th gen. avionics and engine designs. It can supercruise, i.e. cruise without after burners at a supersonic speed. It does have TVC.

Specifically mentions BVR and long-range anti-ground weaponry (stand-off munitions, guided weapons). Two MFI-35 LCD displays in the cockpit. Irbis-E RLS.